• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Axxman300 said:
The bleeding from the ear drums is kind of a give away.
Click to expand...

Primary injuries are caused by blast overpressure waves, or shock waves. Total body disruption is the most severe and invariably fatal primary injury.] Primary injuries are especially likely when a person is close to an exploding munition, such as a land mine. The ears are most often affected by the overpressure, followed by the lungs and the hollow organs of the gastrointestinal tract. Gastrointestinal injuries may present after a delay of hours or even days. Injury from blast overpressure is a pressure and time dependent function. By increasing the pressure or its duration, the severity of injury will also increase.

Extensive damage can also be inflicted upon the auditory system. The tympanic membrane (also known as the eardrum) may be perforated by the intensity of the pressure waves. Furthermore, the hair cells, the sound receptors found within the cochlea, can be permanently damaged and can result in a hearing loss of a mild to profound degree. Additionally, the intensity of the pressure changes from the blast can cause injury to the blood vessels and neural pathways within the auditory system. Therefore, affected individuals can have auditory processing deficits while having normal hearing thresholds. The combination of these effects can lead to hearing loss, tinnitus, headache, vertigo (dizziness), and difficulty processing sound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_injury

Also see
CDC
Explosions and Blast Injuries
A Primer for Clinicians

https://www.cdc.gov/masstrauma/preparedness/primer.pdf
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Why would a skilled military operator use a truck bomb? The Russians are not 'amateur hour' jihadis as was the case in USS Cole, when a couple of guys laden with suicide vests rammed a small boat loaded with 700lbs of explosives into it.

There is finesse and there is bull in a chain shop. Do you think the speznats are the latter?
Click to expand...

Why would a "skilled military operator" take part in a mission which could start a war, and end up with them standing in front of a wall with a blindfold.

The whole point of "skill" is to solve a problem to achieve the desired result. If the mission is to sink a ship the size of Estonia, but not with torpedoes, anti-ship missiles, or artillery then you need a crap loud of high explosives. Lucky for operative(s) Estonia is a Ro-Go ferry, and in 1994 one could just drive a truck packed with explosives onboard. One truck would do it, but any EOD guy would tell you three or four would guarantee the ship sinks.

See, what you clearly don't understand is that setting charges specific to blasting the various locks of the visor is not a simple matter of placing explosives next to or on them. This requires a specific shape charge, and because we're dealing with steel it has to be a cutting charge with a compound that works on steel. These kind of charges leave a signature which would be obvious to just about everyone, certainly an accident investigator. The only other way to blast off the visor would be a big truck packed with a crowd-pleaser. But that would also be obvious because entire front of the ship would be gone, not just the door.

The short version is the bow ramp showed no damage from explosives.
 
Vixen said:
Would this be the same kind gentle people who drop plutonium in the tea of dissidents and come to see the famous spires of Salisbury cathedral, coincidentally, where ex-KGB spies have abdicated to...? Those ones?
Click to expand...

Yes, they killed ONE guy. They didn't blow up the plane he flew out of Moscow on. That's the whole point of having assassins - you kill the person you need dead, not everyone in the zipcode.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Primary injuries are caused by blast overpressure waves, or shock waves. Total body disruption is the most severe and invariably fatal primary injury.] Primary injuries are especially likely when a person is close to an exploding munition, such as a land mine. The ears are most often affected by the overpressure, followed by the lungs and the hollow organs of the gastrointestinal tract. Gastrointestinal injuries may present after a delay of hours or even days. Injury from blast overpressure is a pressure and time dependent function. By increasing the pressure or its duration, the severity of injury will also increase.

Extensive damage can also be inflicted upon the auditory system. The tympanic membrane (also known as the eardrum) may be perforated by the intensity of the pressure waves. Furthermore, the hair cells, the sound receptors found within the cochlea, can be permanently damaged and can result in a hearing loss of a mild to profound degree. Additionally, the intensity of the pressure changes from the blast can cause injury to the blood vessels and neural pathways within the auditory system. Therefore, affected individuals can have auditory processing deficits while having normal hearing thresholds. The combination of these effects can lead to hearing loss, tinnitus, headache, vertigo (dizziness), and difficulty processing sound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_injury

Also see
CDC
Explosions and Blast Injuries
A Primer for Clinicians

https://www.cdc.gov/masstrauma/preparedness/primer.pdf
Click to expand...

I was rock guitarist in my youth. I would expensive earplugs made by 3M (Sonic II). I forgot to wear them to a Ted Nugent concert and I had a headache, vertigo, and tinnitus for about 10 days. No fun. After that I bought extra plugs and this is the only reason I'm not totally deaf today.
 
Vixen said:
She said it had been subjected to a temperature as high as 1,200°C. Captain_Swoop enquired as to whether she knew anything about welding or metal fatigue.
Click to expand...

That is not what happened: he asked if *you* knew anything about the topics.

I'm glad you finally acknowledge that she made no claims that there explosives involved. Does this mean you will recant your previous false attributions?
 
Axxman300 said:
Why would a "skilled military operator" take part in a mission which could start a war, and end up with them standing in front of a wall with a blindfold.

The whole point of "skill" is to solve a problem to achieve the desired result. If the mission is to sink a ship the size of Estonia, but not with torpedoes, anti-ship missiles, or artillery then you need a crap loud of high explosives. Lucky for operative(s) Estonia is a Ro-Go ferry, and in 1994 one could just drive a truck packed with explosives onboard. One truck would do it, but any EOD guy would tell you three or four would guarantee the ship sinks.

See, what you clearly don't understand is that setting charges specific to blasting the various locks of the visor is not a simple matter of placing explosives next to or on them. This requires a specific shape charge, and because we're dealing with steel it has to be a cutting charge with a compound that works on steel. These kind of charges leave a signature which would be obvious to just about everyone, certainly an accident investigator. The only other way to blast off the visor would be a big truck packed with a crowd-pleaser. But that would also be obvious because entire front of the ship would be gone, not just the door.

The short version is the bow ramp showed no damage from explosives.
Click to expand...

Well, the thing about a cutting charge is that the steel looks like it was cut.



 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
To cover the backs of Carl Bildt and the CIA. A patronising attitude that the public did not need to know.
Click to expand...

Why the CIA?

I ask only because the US had its own operation to secure hazardous Soviet military hardware working with NATO and former Eastern Block countries, and this meant we had plenty of opportunity to steal all kinds of things. And we probably did. The thing you must understand is we have our own air force and our own navy, and our navy has a bunch of submarines. And in a pinch we will contract out with local cargo companies to fly or sail something out of a contested area. The reason we do that is to maintain control of the mission, something lost when placing sensitive materials on public transport.

This whole line of conspiracy to stop stolen Rusky hardware is ludicrous.
 
Axxman300 said:
Why the CIA?

I ask only because the US had its own operation to secure hazardous Soviet military hardware working with NATO and former Eastern Block countries, and this meant we had plenty of opportunity to steal all kinds of things. And we probably did. The thing you must understand is we have our own air force and our own navy, and our navy has a bunch of submarines. And in a pinch we will contract out with local cargo companies to fly or sail something out of a contested area. The reason we do that is to maintain control of the mission, something lost when placing sensitive materials on public transport.

This whole line of conspiracy to stop stolen Rusky hardware is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Loads of it was inherited by NATO anyway
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Loads of it was inherited by NATO anyway
Click to expand...

I love the idea that the Russians would sink the Estonia over hardware that was probably decades behind what the western counterpart in technology. But they go to great lengths to steal US technology to this day.

That's just what nations do. They play nice on one level while spying and stealing things from each other. When one country gets caught there is a diplomatic row, ambassadors are recalled, everyone convenes in Switzerland for a few weeks, backroom deals are made, and sometimes someone apologizes...right before stealing something else...

To my knowledge, the only thing where a political leader signs off on the murder of innocent civilians is to stop a confirmed WMD, such as a nuclear warhead, or these day a hijacked jumbo jet. And this would be done in the open.
 
Vixen said:
Metal can be analysed for deformations and from that analysis certain conclusions can be drawn. Prof. in Material Science Ida Westermann of Norwegian NNUT, whose speciality is Steel and Aluminium in which she has written various research papers has analysed the metal on the bow visor and does say the deformation seen - the metal caving in on itself and bein pushed in by 70cm [think about that] was consistent with high temperatures of 1,200°C.



She has microscopically analysed the thing and you have not.
Click to expand...
Has she microscopically analyzed it? How?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
phiwum said:
Has she microscopically analyzed it? How?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Before we look at that we must as always, check for manipulation of the information being "reported" in this thread for signs of deformation.

Alas, but as expected, the good professor's reported words are not those she said:
1. She stated that there was deformation in part of the bow area
2. She furthermore stated that there were microcrystalline changes in the steel's structure in two small locations a couple of centimetres apart, *that were not in the same location as the deformed part* and were indicative of 1200c temp exposure.

No explosions reported.
 
Kid Eager said:
2. She furthermore stated that there were microcrystalline changes in the steel's structure in two small locations a couple of centimetres apart, *that were not in the same location as the deformed part* and were indicative of 1200c temp exposure.
.
Click to expand...

Welding splash.
 
Vixen said:
Faking a few documents to get back some cargo is hardly a deterrent to the USA, the Brits and the Swedes. This was political. It was sending a message. That is what terrorism and war is about. It's not about sending a stern letter, which it had already done twice to diplomats, including MI6.
Click to expand...


Nope, MI6 are not diplomats. Perhaps you mean
Vixen said:
M16
Click to expand...
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Well, the thing about a cutting charge is that the steel looks like it was cut.



Click to expand...


Well yes, a shape charge can make a straight-line cut through steel...

...but there will be a significant visual - and microscopically metallurgical - difference between the separation edges of steel that's been cut with a shape charge, and the separation edges of steel that's undergone a stress fracture.
 
I’m more interested in the new idea that the Russian government sank the Estonia in order to send the Russian government a message. Had they run out of memo pads? And why would the Swedish government have wanted to hush it up?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom